list_vehicles

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It adds useful traits like 'bounded page' and 'canonical' summaries, implying a read-only, paged listing of normalized data. It does not state side effects, ordering, error behavior, or pagination details, but the read-only nature is reasonably inferable from 'List'.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, tightly worded sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, and every phrase contributes meaning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple with two optional parameters and an output schema, so core invocation details are mostly covered. Missing context includes how this listing relates to sibling tools like lookup_vehicle and whether any pagination defaults or ordering behavior are important. It is adequate but not fully complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explicitly explain how limit and offset control the 'bounded page.' The parameter names and defaults communicate some meaning, but the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema-level documentation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the resource ('canonical vehicle summaries from the catalog'), clearly indicating the tool returns a paged collection of summary data. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like lookup_vehicle, though 'bounded page' suggests a listing operation rather than a single lookup.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'for discovery' implies this tool is meant for browsing or exploring the catalog, which gives some usage context. However, there is no explicit statement about when to use this tool versus lookup_vehicle or any other sibling, and no exclusions are provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.